Resources

On an application for summary judgment to enforce an adjudicator’s decision relating to issues arising under a design and build contract, the adjudicator had not breached the rules of natural justice by failing to seek further submissions when adopting a rate of pay which he considered to be “fair and reasonable” and had provided sufficient reasons for his decision.BackgroundThe Claimant (“Clegg”) was the contractor and the Defendant (“Prestige”) the employer under an amended JCT Design and Build contract dated 10 November 2022 for the construction of a leisure and retail centre in Bishop Auckland. Practical completion was achieved, and a dispute arose between the parties in respect of the valuation of the Clegg’s application for payment (“Application 37”). Application 37 was made on 27 August 2024. Prestige served a payment notice in respect of it on 30 August 2024. At that stage, the issues between the parties included the value of eight variations, which were agreed to be changes, but whose valuation in accordance with clause 5 of the contract was not agreed (“the Relevant Changes”), and the Clegg’s entitlement to extensions of time (“EOTs”) and prolongation costs.Clegg…

This appeal arose from a long-term waste management contract entered into between Buckinghamshire Council (“the Council”) and FCC Buckinghamshire Limited (“FCCB”). Under the contract, FCCB was required to build a waste-to-energy facility at Lower Greatmoor Farm, Buckinghamshire (“Greatmoor”). Thereafter, FCCB was required to dispose of the Council’s waste at Greatmoor and also allowed to use excess capacity at Greatmoor to handle waste from third parties.  Where it obtained income from third parties that was “associated with the Project” (defined under the contract as “Third Party Income”), FCCB was required to share a portion of that income with the Council, subject to its right to deduct costs that were “directly incurred” in generating the income and that met the requirements of three further contractual provisos. In an earlier set of proceedings ([2021] EWHC 2867 (TCC)), the Council established that Third Party Income included income received by FCC affiliates from the North London Waste Authority and Hertfordshire County Council for handling waste that was disposed of at Greatmoor. O’Farrell J held that the contractual definition of Third Party Income was “capable of…

Lord Banner KC appeared on behalf of the Generator Group of Companies in a successful planning appeal concerning a major mixed-use development at Horsham Golf Club, following a six-day inquiry in June.The Planning Inspectorate's Inspector Dominic Young allowed the appeal against Horsham District Council’s refusal, granting permission for a Sports and Leisure Hub at Horsham Golf Club, including up to 800 dwellings (280 of which would be affordable housing), a permanent home for Horsham Hockey Club, a new facility for the charity Warren Clark Golfing Dreams, a new home for The Golf College, a remodelled golf course and modern coaching academy, a convenience store and co-working space.The Inspector concluded that the objections, including landscape and transport concerns, were clearly outweighed by the ten benefits summarised (along with the weightings he gave them) at paragraph 62 of the decision.Charles was instructed by David Churchill and Amon Yiu of Carter Jonas, calling expert evidence from David on planning, from Richard Fox on landscape, and from Clive Burbridge (Iceni Projects) on highways and transport.The full Appeal Decision can be accessed here.